differences are real and best respected when allowed to develop naturally

While rationalism at the individual level is a plea for more personal autonomy from cultural norms, at the social level
it is often a claim - or arrogation - of power to stifle the autonomy of others. - Thomas Sowell

Since the 1960s, we have seen the failure of the melting pot ideology. This ideology suggested that different historical,
cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds could be subordinated to a larger ideology or social amalgam which is "America."
This concept obviously did not work, because paradoxically America encourages a politics of contestation.

George W. Bush's strenuous efforts at "minority outreach" were rewarded by the lowest fraction of the black vote
since Barry Goldwater. Depending on which exit poll you consult, Dubya carried between 8% and 10% of African-American voters.
Since Election Day, the Democrats and the press have gleefully been asking Republicans: "How are you going to stop doing
so shamefully badly among blacks?" For them, it's as much fun as asking: "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

Strikingly, Republicans seem to agree that there is something illegitimate about their victories unless a larger
fraction of the "black community" gives its blessing. Consider the January 10th Wall Street Journal column hyping
the Martin Luther King Day wingding at the Heritage Institute on "How the new administration can reach out to black America."
Gerald F. Seib gave a revealing example of what he sees as the GOP's need to win more black votes:

"In three
states -- Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana -- more than half of Al Gore's total votes came from blacks. Yet he lost all three
because the white vote went heavily for Mr. Bush."

Hmmhmmh Maybe I'm missing something, Mr. Seib, but wouldn't
the Republican sweep of those three states be a problem for Democrats, not Republicans?

Republican have been furiously
scratching their heads over how to draw more black votes. For example, when I started reading the Free Republic responses
to my VDARE article (GOP Future Depends on Winning Larger Share of the White Vote) I presumed that many of the attacks on
my thesis would center on the alleged inevitability of immigration population. Yet, most respondents seemed bored with thinking
about immigrants. What everybody wanted to talk about was why blacks didn't vote Republican.

· First thing
to remember: despite all the moral glamour that our society invests in "civil rights leaders" like Jesse Jackson,
African-Americans are neither a fast-growing group nor even a terribly large one. No pundit should be allowed to expound on
election strategy without first proving he knows the answer to this simple question:

The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal. - Peter Brimelow

MULTICULTURALISM: Harmful To America by Bob Baecht

Those who promote political correctness and multiculturalism seem to to be making a deliberate effort to destroy America.
The overzealous feminists, many black leaders, the liberal democrats, the colleges and universities, the school systems, the
homosexual lobbies, and so-called child advocates, somehow seem to have banded together to create a nation in which every
group is learning to hate another group.

Many leaders of the black community have made racial problems worse with
their constant harping about police brutality, racial profiling, demanding reparations for sins of past generations, insisting
upon affirmative action in every phase of life and promoting the ideas that all inventions and achievements are a result of
black efforts. People like Jesse Jackson, Charlie Rangel, Kweise Mfume, and Al Sharpton make every effort to make people believe
that all whites hate all blacks and that a deliberate effort is being made to "keep them in their place." It is
difficult to come to any conclusion but that they are not sincere in their efforts to promote racial peace and equality but
to stir up trouble to enhance their own image and to gain power and prestige for themselves.

Child welfare advocates
have tried to divide children and their parents by such ideas as encouraging children to sue parents, and for under-age girls
to obtain abortions without knowledge of parents. In the schools the children are encouraged to "tattle" on their
parents and reveal the most intimate details of what goes on within the family. Against the wishes of many parents the children
are indoctrinated with sex education and the distribution of condoms is encouraged. Hillary preaches that "it takes a
village" to raise children and advances the idea that it is the responsibility of the community and the "intelligent
people" like her, not the parents, to determine the welfare of children. What an arrogant, egotistical and conceited
idea!

Institutions of higher learning teach that there is no difference between males and females and that most
men are potential rapists. They encourage promiscuity and provide unisex restrooms and dorms. They promote the idea that sex
is is just an innocent entertainment, the purpose of which is not to insure the continuation of the race but as a form of
amusement like dancing or swimming, yet they scream loudly when males attempt to take advantage of this new "freedom."
The old ideals of male chivalry and female modesty are denigrated and a woman is made to believe that a mate in her life is
unecessary and burdensome. The old song that says that, "It's till the same old story, the fight for love and glory,
a case of do or die. Woman needs man and man must have his mate; that no one can deny," has now been denied in spite
of the fact that it has been considered true for centuries. Some women even get insulted if a man shows the courtesy of opening
a door for them. The joys of political correctness!

The extreme homosexuals flaunt their lifestyle in parades
with nudity, suggestive actions and "gay pride." They insist that the lifestyle be given the same respect as conventional
lifestyles and proclaim that it must be taught in schools so that children will accept it as being normal and to teach the
youngsters not to "discriminate." Most of us do not care what homosexuals do in their private lives but are offended
when lewd behavior is practiced in public -- just as we are offended when heterosexual couples behave in a crude manner in
public.

Because of massive immigration, and the onset of multicultualism, we have made the United States into a
"Tower of Babel" with more than 350 languages being used. In earlier days immigrants assimilated into American society
and learned English. They retained some of the culture from their previous lands but became Americans -- not "hyphenated"
Americans. They accepted, even embraced, American values and were happy to enjoy the fruits of an American Constitutional
system of government. Today we have multiculturalism, which is the exact opposite of assimilation. This country has been called
the "melting pot of the world" but now it is no longer so and many of those who come to America do not want to be
"melted" and assimilated into the traditional culture as formerly practiced in the nation.

Textbooks
have been re-written to emphasize cultural differences and to negate the "classical" education based mostly on writings
of "dead white males," and the philosophic thought on which our society is based. It seems to be accepted that the
difference in cultures is a result of nature rather nurture and that for this reason it is believed that people of different
cultures or races actually are very different from each other. It is assumed that a white professor cannot teach black students
because he is not capable of understanding "black culture." I think it would really be stretching things to NOT
come to the conclusion that people, no matter from what race or what culture, are basically the same and have pretty much
the same aspirations and needs. It seems obvious that people can be "brainwashed" or "programmed" to accept
whatever dogma that the elite wish them to accept. People from other lands came to America because She offered freedom and
the opportunity to develop their talents and, as they say of the Marines, "Be -- all that you can be!" Now they
come to take advantage af all the give-aways and refuse to even learn the language of the country. Of course this does not
apply to ALL immigrants as there are many that come to escape the even worse oppression in other countries.

It
would seem an exercize in futility to argue over which race invented what or to which race we owe our culture, science or
philosophy. The basis for the traditional culture that we have enjoyed has come from many sources. While much of the basis
for American society owes its immediate source to mostly British thought over several past centuries, they were certainly
not completely original in their thinking, gaining much of the knowledge and understanding from other earlier societies. What
could be more divisive, stupid, and less productive than arguing over the question of whether the ancient Egyptians were black
or whether they were white or what the color of the skin of Jesus Christ was.

As mentioned before, those ethnic
groups that emigrated in earlier times did assimilate but at the same time preserved some of the cultural aspects of their
former lands. Hence we have weiners, spaghetti, pizza, tortillas, swiss cheese, chow mein, certain dances, music, and many
other "cultural imports" from foreign lands that everyone has come to appreciate and enjoy. Yet those who brought
these things from the old country, or wherever they came from, became Americans and their allegience was to America.

It would appear that the only minority group in America today who is not granted special privilege is the white male
who bears the brunt of affirmative action, quotas, feminism, discrimination, preferences for other minorities and the propaganda
promoted by these various pressure groups. It is difficult to determine what the motives are for these different groups to
promote such division in this great country. The only thing that I can think of is that they WANT to create a society that
sets the rich against the poor; men against women; children against parents; blacks against whites; gays against straights;
and to generally create an atmosphere of hate so that they can then exert their influence and become more powerful and be
in a better position to rule. As wise old Abe Lincoln said, "a house divided against itself cannot stand," and it
would appear as if those who generate this unreasoning hatred may have this motive. They do not want the United States to
exist it as has been. And who was it that said something to the effect that "if we do not all hang together, we will
surely all hang separately"?

A great many people think they are thinking when they are rearranging their prejudices.

- William James

Multiculturalism is racism in a politically-correct guise.
It holds that an individual's identity and personal worth are determined by ethnic/racial membership and that all cultures
are of equal worth, regardless of their moral views or how they treat people. Multiculturalism holds that ethnic identity
should be a central factor in educational and social policy decisions. Multiculturalism would turn this country into a collection
of separatist groups competing with each other for power.

Multiculturalism is a grave threat to this country. Multiculturalism
is a threat to education: instead of encouraging students to question their assumptions and the assumptions of their parents
and society, multiculturalism demands that students accept blindly what they're given. Instead of encouraging reason and independent
judgment, multiculturalism demands obedience to authority: the authority of the ethnic group.

This site is part of
the Ayn Rand Institute's mission to challenge the altruist-collectivist ideas underlying much public policy and undermining
our rights and liberties. Please visit the ARI web site at www.aynrand.org to learn more about our programs directed at high
schools, universities and the general public.

The secret of the demagogue is
to make himself as stupid as his audience so that they believe they are as clever as he.

I fully defend the right and the proper behavior of discrimination. ITS the nature of man, NOT to willingly accept the tenants
of 'Diversity'. The only relevant question is: 'How can we organize a society where each individual will have the ability
to live among their own like minded kind?' The concept of ONE Nation, (as applied in the US), is absurd and should be discredited.
This is NOT the goal, people. When you finally learn this lesson, you may start to begin to clear the confusion from your
thinking. South Africa's policy of 'Apartheid' was proper and produced a viable civilization. Just look at the chaos that
has taken over now, by a culture that is alien to traditional Western Culture. Is that what you are willing to accept for
yourself?

Diversity is NOT an issue of skin color, its all about your 'VALUES'. The 'PC' culture is the enemy,
folks. Its time to resist its acceptance, at work, at home and in every social setting. Its WAR, start fighting . . .

A recent edition of
the Victoria Times-Colonist carried two articles in its front section that demonstrate more than anything the primacy of phony
issues in the Quebec referendum debate.

In one article, reporting on Louis Farrakhan's Million Man march on Washington,
is a description of the speakers and performers at the rally, including that "Maya Angelou read a poem urging the crowd to
do right by itself and `save your race.'" In other descriptions, we read: "Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March called together
black men for a day of praying, singing and reveling in racial unity." Farrakhan is quoted as urging the crowd: "Black man,
you don't have to bash white people...All you got to do is go back home and turn our communities into productive places. All
you have to do is go back home and make our communities a decent and safe place to live."

Meanwhile, in Quebec, Lucien
Bouchard was and is trying to do just that, for Quebeckers, and for that he was attacked as both racist and sexist. All he
did was "[argue] that endless constitutional quarrels have prevented Quebeckers from solving everyday problems, such as the
need for more support for women raising children. `Do you think it makes sense that we have so few children in Quebec?' he
said. `We're one of the white races that has fewest children, that's really something. That suggests we haven't solved our
family problems.'"

Bouchard was of course, attacked for his comments. In defence of them, Parizeau said, "If you're
asking whether the majority of the population is rather white in the face, while other members of the same population are
of other colors, I will say yes indeed."

So what makes it right that Farrakhan can say what he does, without the slightest
murmur of "racist," while Bouchard must be lambasted - and be seen to be lambasted by everyone who's anyone - throughout the
land, for that particular infamy?

It certainly is not because that's a real issue in Quebec, any more than it's a
real issue anywhere else. No, it's because of the fear attached to the "racist" epithet, the manipulation of the perception
of popularity, and the media's cowardly adherence to what is politically desirable. Logical consistency has nothing to do
with it. If the "yes" side can win against all this it will be a miracle indeed.

from - The Western Separatist Papers

Subscribe
to RSS headline updates from: Powered by FeedBurner

From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their
actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before
the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict which each other; and we can achieve either
one or the other, but not both at the same time. - F.A. Hayek